If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Now, I do not wish for this to become another thread just like all of the others, but I do find it a tad rich that people are complaining about Micheal's journalism here now just because he is being a little gruff about Canonical, when many of you all failed to rise or complain when he trash-talked the new Anaconda, LGP or whatever else he has failed to take a shine to. Michael is just being Michael, and if you could put up with it then, you can put up with it now.

Now, I do not wish for this to become another thread just like all of the others, but I do find it a tad rich that people are complaining about Micheal's journalism here now just because he is being a little gruff about Canonical, when many of you all failed to rise or complain when he trash-talked the new Anaconda, LGP or whatever else he has failed to take a shine to. Michael is just being Michael, and if you could put up with it then, you can put up with it now.

How many negative articles were posted about Anaconda? Or on LGP? Are you serious? Here are the Mir articles for the last week:

Hi you must be new here, otherwise you would know exactly what Hamish is talking about. If you follow Phoronix on a regular basis at all you'd know that he pretty much bashes on everything except for technologies he happens to be favoring at the moment, You want to see him really bashing find an article on the Radeon Southern Islands support...

However of your list let's mark out how many are interpretations/reposts of people blogs and thus are essentially newsworthy in that regard:

and what's left? well an announcement on Xorg.. The only reason the number of posts here is slightly higher than average in terms of Mir is essentially due to the fact that Larabel summarizes blog posts by influential people. That they're negative reflects the overall negative reaction towards canonical by the related bloggers, and it's not like they're without reason, Canonical played foul and the larger community has reacted against them as a result.

Do note that Larabel has been accused of favouring Ubuntu before in the past due to his almost exclusive use for it for benchmarking. What I would like to know is where are all of these canonical (not even fanboys really for ubuntu but canonical) fanboys coming from? Is Shuttleworth secretly setting up raids on Phoronix with his other skunkworks projects?

Edit: and actually reviewing the related all on larabel posts I'd see he really wasn't being that negative at all on those

It would be nice to have more than just minimize and maximize.
Support for custom things so Wayland does not dictate in any way what kinds of window changes there are. Makes it possible to not have to change protocols when doing other things:http://www.4t-niagara.com/tray.html

Personally I don't like the idea of minimize might see something on taskbar.
Would like a minimize-taskbar and minimize-tray action for that.

Don't consider Wayland in a post 1.0 state when this is not done yet.
I understand it takes a long time to design it well but there should be no shame in not doing a 1.0 release yet.

And why not separate "your drawing surface is invisible for now" ? (With additional "give us one frame preatty please"?)

Something like this. In a generic world, you would only ever tell the app what size the draw surface is, and that is it - an app should just infer 0x0 as being hidden, and just needs metrics to ask "am I minimized?", "am I as big as I can get?" "am I as big as the entire screen?" but the app would ask those questions, it wouldn't be told them, because that isn't inherently necessary information.

I imagine it would be the responsibility of a toolkit to capture the state of an app prior to a minimize and store it as a preview. It shouldn't be an applications responsibility to generate those snapshot images.

Though hidden seems like a reasonable compromise. Maybe even "max size". I wonder, is Wayland going to implement awful separate fullscreen app context behavior like X, where fullscreen apps basically crap all over the window system, and have "fullscreen" just be a borderless window, or keep that awful mechanism? A smart DE should just suppress updates if the entire display is captured by an app in chromeless mode.

Hahaha the Wayland that is done, that is version 1.0, released, the greatest thing ever so good it's not in any distro since nobody deserves them, couldn't minimize? Sure, Wayland is complete...riiight...

like Sinatra, canonical might sing: "...and do it my way."

This shows how long it takes to design and implement well a full-featured modern display server, with Wayland having been developed for about five years now while Canonical hopes Mir will be ready by later in the year and ready for all form-factors by next April.

Well, they might do it the canonical way. Take all the hard work from others - eg take the Wayland solution of how this minimize thing has been solved - , put some ubuntu sauce on it, so it can't be used anywhere else and call it their own, superior Mir solution.

Well, they might do it the canonical way. Take all the hard work from others - eg take the Wayland solution of how this minimize thing has been solved - , put some ubuntu sauce on it, so it can't be used anywhere else and call it their own, superior Mir solution.

Just a thought.

less coolness pls
first, i supposed that leveraging the hard work from others (so that you can "stand on the shoulders of giants") was the whole point of the GPL - now becomes a crime?
second, AFAIK (correct me if im wrong) Wayland puts much window management awareness onto clients, and involves communication between clients, the WM and the compositor) involving - whereas if i understand it correctly, Mir wants to achieve single process operation and as transparent window management as possible - that sais diametrically opposite approaches to me

thus, if wayland code is looked at (difficult, going tdd implies writing one testcase > one code line > one testcase > one code line, thus only ad hoc code ends up in place) that would be for the basics (like the redraw loop) or as a reference how not to do things